On 08/21/2012 THE PRIVATE BANK OF CALIFORNIA filed a Contract - Business lawsuit against ELLA AVERY SMOTHERS. This case was filed in Los Angeles County Superior Courts, Santa Monica Courthouse located in Los Angeles, California. The Judges overseeing this case are ALLAN J. GOODMAN, NANCY L. NEWMAN, H. CHESTER HORN, JR., CRAIG D. KARLAN, LISA HART COLE and GERALD ROSENBERG. The case status is Disposed - Judgment Entered.
****8165
08/21/2012
Disposed - Judgment Entered
Los Angeles County Superior Courts
Santa Monica Courthouse
Los Angeles, California
ALLAN J. GOODMAN
NANCY L. NEWMAN
H. CHESTER HORN, JR.
CRAIG D. KARLAN
LISA HART COLE
GERALD ROSENBERG
BANK OF CALIFORNIA
PRIVATE BANK OF CALIFORNIA THE
BANC OF CALIFORNIA
AVERY LOPEZ
FINANCE CORPORATION
GENERAL ELECTRIC CAPITAL FRANCHISE
METRO MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS INC.
OMNI FOODS INC.
SMOTHERS ELLA AVERY
SMOTHERS RONSON
LOPEZ AVERY
FREITAG KRISTA
CALIFORNIA FOOD MANAGEMENT LLC
DOWDALL TYLER R.
EPPORT RICHMAN & ROBBINS
QUARLES & BRADY LLP
CHRIS CAMPBELL
VEGA JOYCE H.
JEROME P. BURGER
NICOLAI ADAM C.
FINLAYSON WILLIAMS TOFFER ROOSEVELT LILLY
KRAUSE-LEEMON DAVID R.
BURGER JEROME P.
DAVIS WRIGHT TREMAINE LLP
CAMPBELL CHRIS
SADRI TONY S.
GUSTAFSON JOHN RYAN
LILLY FINLAYSON WILLIAMS TOFFER ROOSEVELT
VEIGUELA PETER J.
8/10/2018: Request for Judicial Notice
8/10/2018: Motion for Attorney Fees
8/31/2018: Opposition
9/7/2018: Reply
at 08:30 AM in Department P; Ruling on Submitted Matter (Ruling on Submitted Matter; Court Makes Order) -
at 08:59 AM in Department P; Unknown Event Type - Held - Taken under Submission
at 08:59 am in Department WEP, Nancy L. Newman, Presiding; Motion - Other (FOR ADDITIONAL AWARD OF ATTORNEYSFEES INCURRED IN DEFENDING ANDENFORCING SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT;) - Matter is taken under submission
Ord-Appt Apprv Rptr as Rptr protem ((OFFICIAL REPORTER PRO TEMPORE: JASMINE JAMILI, LICENSE #13742) ); Filed by Attorney for Plaintiff
Order Appointing Court Approved Reporter as Official Reporter Pro Tempore; Filed by PRIVATE BANK OF CALIFORNIA, THE (Plaintiff)
Reply In Support of Motion for Additional Award of Attorneys' Fees
Reply; Filed by BANC OF CALIFORNIA (Plaintiff)
Reply (AND MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES OF PLAINTIFF/JUDGMENT CREDITOR IN SUPPORT OF MOTIN FOR ADDITIONAL AWARD OF ATTORNEYS' FEES ); Filed by Judgment Creditor
Opposition (TO BANK'S MOTION FOR ATTORNEY'S FEES ); Filed by Attorney for Defendant
Opposition To Bank's Motion for Attornets' Fees
Amendment to Complaint (DOE 1 AND DOE 51 OMNI FOODS, INC. ); Filed by Attorney for Plaintiff
Answer; Filed by RONSON SMOTHERS (Defendant)
Answer; Filed by ELLA AVERY SMOTHERS (Defendant); METRO MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS,INC. (Defendant); AVERY LOPEZ (Defendant)
Answer (VERIFIED ANSWER OF DEFENDANTS ELLA AVERY-SMOTHERS, METRO MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS, INC., AND AVERY LOPEZ, LLC ); Filed by Attorney for Defendant
Answer (VERIFIED ANSWER TO COMPLAINT ); Filed by Attorney for Defendant
Proof-Service/Summons; Filed by PRIVATE BANK OF CALIFORNIA, THE (Plaintiff)
Proof-Service/Summons; Filed by Attorney for Plaintiff
Proof-Service/Summons; Filed by PRIVATE BANK OF CALIFORNIA, THE (Plaintiff)
Complaint; Filed by PRIVATE BANK OF CALIFORNIA, THE (Plaintiff); BANC OF CALIFORNIA (Plaintiff)
Complaint Filed
Case Number: SC118165 Hearing Date: October 29, 2019 Dept: P
The Private Bank of California v. Ella Avery Smothers et al. CASE NUMBER: SC118165
HEARING DATE: 8/29/2019
Plaintiff’s motion for attorney’s fees
TENTATIVE RULING
Judgment was entered for plaintiff /judgment creditor The Private Bank of California in May 2015. In satisfaction of this judgment and another related judgment, the parties signed a settlement agreement requiring defendants to sell four Burger King restaurants and apply the proceeds towards the judgments. The settlement contained an attorney’s fees clause.
After the sale of the restaurants, defendants sought disgorgement of $555,000.00 in sale proceeds; the court denied the motion. Plaintiff then filed a motion for an award of attorneys’ fees incurred in enforcing the settlement agreement, and judgment debtors filed a motion to tax costs. In August 2018, the Bank filed a motion for an additional award of attorneys’ fees, seeking to recover fees incurred in its efforts to enforce the settlement and its previous fee award. That motion was denied without prejudice, with the court instructing the Bank to file the instant motion and requiring the Bank to demonstrate all fees sought were attributable to collection efforts under the settlement agreement.
Once a party is awarded attorneys’ fees, the award is treated like a judgment and additional fees incurred in collecting the award are also recoverable if they are “reasonable and necessary.” Lucky United Properties Investment, Inc. v. Lee (2013) 213 Cal.App.4th 635. “A court may not rubber stamp a request for attorney’s fees but must determine the number of hours reasonably expended.” Donahue v. Donahue (2010) 182 Cal.App.4th 259, 271.
Via this motion, plaintiff does not seek a specific fee award, but rather a general order stating it is entitled to recover fees incurred enforcing the prior fee order. Defendants do not dispute plaintiff’s entitlement to such fees, but argue the motion should be denied because plaintiff has not set forth the number of hours reasonably expended. Defendant is correct. Granting plaintiff’s motion would have no effect, since a determination that plaintiff is entitled to recover some fees does not mean that plaintiff is entitled to recover all claimed fees. This motion is premature—plaintiff must set forth the amount of fees claimed and explain why the amount is reasonable and necessary. DENIED without prejudice.